Santa Ana Acts to Retain Appellate Court

The Santa Ana City Council hired two lobbying firms Monday to help keep a state appellate court in the city, despite efforts by UC Irvine to move the court to its campus.

State court officials are undecided whether to put the court, which currently operates out of a converted house near downtown Santa Ana, into a new, $17-million courthouse in the Santa Ana Civic Center, or to build a facility at UCI, which would buoy the university’s campaign to create a law school.

The decision will be made by the state Judicial Council, and final approval will come from the state Public Works Board.

“We need to strongly position the Santa Ana proposal,” said Santa Ana Councilman Jose Solorio. “These firms have media and public relations expertise. They can make Santa Ana’s case.”

The council awarded contracts to Glaab and Associates to lobby state officials, and Waters and Faubel to lobby judicial officials in Orange County and to promote the city’s position with the news media.

Each firm will be paid $10,000 for two months’ work.

UCI’s bid has upset Santa Ana officials, who worry that the loss of the appellate court to Irvine could damage the city’s reputation as a seat of government.

“There’s a long list of people who will need to know the city’s interest and its point of view,” said City Manager David N. Ream. “These firms will help us with our efforts.”

Neither UCI nor Irvine City Hall has hired lobbyists to argue for the court’s relocation, city and university officials said.

One of Santa Ana’s consultants already has asked David G. Sills, presiding judge of the appellate court, to order the public release of the two-page UCI proposal, which Santa Ana officials have not yet seen.

Although public record laws allow entities to keep real estate transactions private, public relations consultant Meg Waters argues that since the Santa Ana proposal was made public, UCI’s should be too.

“We understand that the UCI proposal has been presented in secret to the court’s local advisory council. This local advisory council is supposed to represent the public; it meets on public property and discusses public issues. We believe the public has every right to know what the details of the UCI proposal are so that an honest side-by-side comparison can be made,” the city told Sills in a letter drafted by Waters. “This will also help us to determine whether UCI, a state agency, has subsidized the court project at the expense of the UC system.”

“We as a rule do not discuss publicly real estate transactions with outside interests,” said Clifford Ham, senior project manager for the Office of Court Construction and Management at the state Judicial Council.

Waters said the letter and other efforts she will make on behalf of Santa Ana would help the city “get their side of the argument out there.... We want to bring back a rational discussion about the court.”